Management of Development Restriction Zones after 2020

Kim Jung-un, Associate Research Fellow, Lee U-min, Associate Research Fellow

Summary

1. Since the late 1990s, the government has devised urban planning under the main principle of “conducting environmental research and urban planning first and then lifting development restriction zones” to set an overall volume of lifting restrictions for each region. It allowed the lifting of restrictions only for public development that transformed development restricted land into territory for urban use when these development projects met standards. (Developed areas in seven metropolitan regions covered a combined area of 187 ㎢, or just four percent of the initially lifted zones)

2. Strict management of such zones has encouraged spiral development of urban areas outside the zones in certain regions, and the concept of growth management has not been reflected in the process of transforming and utilizing such zones into usable urban land. Under the circumstances, lifting such zones in small areas lacking or deficient in infrastructure has led to many problems in urban planning and management. 

3. To coordinate and utilize such zones after 2020, the Act on Establishing Metropolitan City Planning needs amendment. In addition, efforts must go toward streamlining regulations on the management of small areas where zones are lifted so that a) the principle of growth management is promoted when coordinating zones for the sake of providing urban land, b) the public aspect of lifting such zones is strengthened, c) the full volume of lifting restrictions listed in the 2020 metropolitan city plans is efficiently distributed and plans to utilize land are established, and d) resident inconvenience is resolved. 

Policy proposals

① The principle of urban growth management must be promoted when coordinating development restriction zones to provide more urban land: when existing land within a city area is too small to implement public projects and such zones have to be utilized, the government needs to encourage projects to utilize areas close to the urban districts within the zones. This will enhance the concept of urban growth management. 

② The public aspect of lifting such zones must be enhanced. Land for public use has to be secured when conducting land use planning; the public sector’s dominance needs to be ensured when the private sector participates in the project; and profits from development projects require objective estimation and taxation through a system, which enhances the requirement of the projects to contribute to society. In project agencies and content, certain projects with lower public value should not be allowed to lift zones. 

③ Plans to efficiently distribute and utilize the full area of land lifted from zones listed in the 2020 Metropolitan City Plans have to be created: the period for the use of the remaining areas for development listed in the 2020 plans should be extended until 2040. Certain local governments that have exceeded the permissible size of areas for development must pay fees to other local governments or designate new zones to secure more areas for development. Nationwide, the volume of land lifted from the zones must be prevented from increasing after 2020. 

④ Improvement is needed in the management method for small areas whose zones have been lifted to alleviate resident inconvenience. Development planning by a district unit, which has not worked as a tool for maintaining collective settlement and utilizing small land scattered across the area, needs selective establishment when lifting the zones. The permissible size of areas for use and development, however, may be increased only when maintaining collective settlement. More financial support from the government is also needed for projects meant to improve living conditions of residents in the zones, while development in the zones remain restricted. ​